Reply to For HYPSM, do humanities kids need 4 years of science?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "For HYPSM, do humanities kids need 4 years of science?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]vs. 4 years of history, vs. 4 years of a foreign language? What is this fascination with science? Add another history or foreign language course instead.

This won’t be why there’s an HYPSM rejection: “darn it, a humanities kid, and we need way more, but no 4 years of science. Into the circular file!” There will be 100 other reasons kid is rejected; not that.

The flip side is also true: “5 years of science. Fantastic candidate. We need more STEM majors. Admit!”[/quote]

The problem for this kid is that there will be plenty of other kids applying with 4 years of science AND 4 years of social studies AND 4 years of world language. So, you're right that their application won't necessarily be dumped into the garbage upon arrival, but they will be compared to the students who have the coursework and rigor in everything.

Of course there will be examples of students who succeeded without 4 years of science, and if an anecdote here or there makes OP feel better, that's nice. But OP should know that a story like that doesn't prove that 3 years of science will be treated like 4 (or 5) years of science. It will be seen as a deliberate choice—which might be the right one for the kid—that may have consequences for admissions.[/quote]
I agree there may be consequences for admissions; I just think it’s unlikely.

I disagree there are “plenty of other kids” wanting to study humanities (with such a demonstrated interest, and top notch in everything else.) You are saying the differentiator between 3 or 4-year science kids wanting to study humanities may be their “rigor.” Well, depends: multiple APs in languages, or that fourth year of science? In that instance, it’s a choice alright, but not, to me, about rigor. Assuming the other science grades are strong, it would be a choice based not on avoidance but on opportunity.

I acknowledge that some AOs will see it your way. But most won’t and, for that reason, kid should choose courses based on intellectual interests and not what may or may not get them into college (elite colleges actually like this, if it comes through in the application).

Another important consideration: more kids are admitted for humanities than actually end up studying them. There is a “switch over” issue and some kids, at least, are trying to game the system. Even many who are not doing so consciously at application will succumb to external pressures and major in something more “practical.” Double majors in humanities and STEM/CS/Econ still make demands on teaching resources (and quality of instruction) for the “usual suspect” disciplines that these schools are trying to minimize.

What I am suggesting is that some of these 4-year science kids and, especially, 5-year science kids studying multivariate calculus are very likely “switcheroos,” whether they are conscious of it now or not. No, I am certainly not saying 3 years of science should, for that reason, be preferred over 4. But I am saying that, unlike STEM applicants (which is an understatement to say there are “plenty of”), any given two humanities applicants will not be alike: the differentiator will in that sense not be who has taken 4 years of science, but who is the true humanities applicant for that particular (under-enrolled) humanities discipline. Bonus for those with no interest in double-majoring in CS etc.![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics